Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39331371›Full record

ArticleJAMA health forum2024

Inequities in Self-Reported Social Risk Factors by Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity.

Kevin H Nguyen, Timothy W Levengood, Allegra R Gordon, Leesh Menard, Heidi L Allen, Gilbert Gonzales

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA health forum, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Kevin H NguyenDepartment of Health Law, Policy, and Management, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts.
Timothy W LevengoodDepartment of Health Law, Policy, and Management, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts.
Allegra R GordonDepartment of Community Health Sciences, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts.
Leesh MenardSchool of Social Work, Columbia University, New York, New York.
Heidi L AllenSchool of Social Work, Columbia University, New York, New York.
Gilbert GonzalesDepartment of Medicine, Health, and Society, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Sexual minority (ie, people who self-identify as gay, lesbian, bisexual, and other nonheterosexual identities) and gender minority (ie, people who self-identify as transgender, nonbinary, or other noncisgender identities) adults report worse health outcomes compared with heterosexual and cisgender adults, respectively. Although social risk factors (SRFs; eg, housing instability) are associated with health outcomes, little is known about the prevalence of SRFs among sexual and gender minority adults. Objective: To examine differences in the prevalence of SRFs by sexual orientation and gender identity among adults. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System data collected from January 2022 to February 2023 for adults aged 18 years or older residing in 22 US states. Exposure: Self-reported sexual orientation and gender identity. Main Outcomes and Measures: Outcome measures were dissatisfaction with life, lack of emotional support, social isolation, employment loss in the past 12 months, Supplementary Nutrition Assistance Program participation in the past 12 months, insufficient food, inability to pay bills, inability to pay utilities, lack of transportation, and stress. Survey weights were applied. Multivariable linear regression models were used to measure the association between sexual orientation and gender identity for each outcome. Results: The study sample comparing outcomes by sexual orientation included 178 803 individuals: 84 881 men (48.5%; 92.9% heterosexual; 7.1% sexual minority) and 93 922 women (51.5%; 89.4% heterosexual; 10.6% sexual minority). The study sample comparing outcomes by gender identity included 182 690 adults (99.2% cisgender; 0.8% gender minority). Of sexual minority women, 58.1% reported at least 1 SRF compared with 36.5% of heterosexual women. Sexual minority women were significantly more likely to report social isolation (difference, 7.4 percentage points [PP]; 95% CI, 4.9-10.0 PP) and stress (difference, 12.2 PP; 95% CI, 9.8-14.7 PP) compared with heterosexual women. A greater proportion of sexual minority men (51.1%) reported at least 1 SRF than heterosexual men (34.0%); the largest magnitudes of inequity were in dissatisfaction with life (difference, 7.9 PP; 95% CI, 5.8-10.1 PP) and stress (difference, 6.7 PP; 95% CI, 4.5-8.9 PP). Of gender minority adults, 64.1% reported at least 1 SRF compared with cisgender adults (37.1%). Gender minority adults were significantly more likely to report social isolation (difference, 14.8 PP; 95% CI, 9.9-19.7 PP) and stress (difference, 17.0 PP; 95% CI, 11.9-22.1 PP). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study, sexual and gender minority adults were significantly more likely to report multiple SRFs. These findings suggest that policies and community-based systems to advance socioeconomic equity among sexual and gender minority adults are critical.

Indexed as

Gender IdentitySelf ReportSexual and Gender MinoritiesAdolescentAdultAgedBehavioral Risk Factor Surveillance SystemCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRisk FactorsSexual BehaviorSocial IsolationUnited States

Identifiers

PMID39331371
PMCPMC11437382

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.